Welcome to Thunderdome

The Great Barrier Reef is fucked and so is most life in the oceans probably.

Ok, while this thread is usually about pointing out dumb shit, this is actually pretty legit. While coral reef death can absolutely be natural (Happens all the time, so don't feel bad about sea urchins being used in cooking. They're a plague.), there is stuff man does that harms a lot of them, which we should be preventing.

Well, that sucks.

The planet was much warmer in the non-too-distant past.

Coral reefs existed, then.

GORDON wrote: The planet was much warmer in the non-too-distant past.

Coral reefs existed, then.

I found a reference for 50M years ago being warmer.



Also, I assume it's a difference in rate of change of warmer/colder than matters here.

GORDON wrote: The planet was much warmer in the non-too-distant past.

Coral reefs existed, then.

True, however the damage being done is not exclusively temperature related. This is not simply a global warming thing.

Chemicals being dumped into reef areas is a major factor. (Google "red tide Florida" for a current example of such a thing killing off a fuckton of marine life.)

Also, overfishing is a major killer of coral reefs.

First Google hit said 125k years ago.

Coral reefs existed then.

So did Polar Bears.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/ ... /96713338/

Red tide is a natural phenomenon that's been happening at least for centuries.

Vince wrote: Red tide is a natural phenomenon that's been happening at least for centuries.

So are wildfires. But that doesn't mean humans don't cause some of them.

Between the rising temperatures (natural or unnatural), fucked up fishing practices (dynamiting the coral wtf), and the various run-offs, the coral is getting wrecked. I've seen it in every Pacific dive site i've been to this year. It sure doesn't feel natural. Small spots of living coral amongst vast swathes of white graveyards.

Vince wrote: Red tide is a natural phenomenon that's been happening at least for centuries.

Of course, however not in the Gulf side of Southern Florida. They even know exactly why it's happening: Chemicals from sugar plants that used to be filtered through the everglades were diverted to the Gulf and aren't being filtered. So while red tides have happened, this one is undeniably happening thanks to humans.

GORDON wrote: First Google hit said 125k years ago.

Coral reefs existed then.

So did Polar Bears.

I really don't understand your stance. Are you saying humans aren't responsible? Are you saying we don't need to do anything?

Let's say that global temps aren't a factor because coral reefs have existed in warmer times. There is still undeniable damage being done by chemicals and overfishing.

Leisher wrote: Are you saying humans aren't responsible? Are you saying we don't need to do anything?

Maybe it's this?

It's the people saying that if the ocean temps.rise a degree, were going to see the destruction of coastal cities, and the extinction of animal species including coral, and polar bears. These people don't understand that humans won't just idly watch big waves inundate cities, and these animal species lived when conditions were much warmer.

Now, if you're arguing that pollution or dynamite or oil.spills are killing specific areas, I'd argue that's a different subject than anthropogenic global warming.

GORDON wrote: and these animal species lived when conditions were much warmer.

Rate of change to allow adaptation does not matter?

I'd say no. It isnt that drastic and quick of a change. It.isnt like they won't have time to shed the winter coat before the temperature rockets up an average of one degree over a few decades.

But I'm sure there are STUDIES that say otherwise.

I'm very much in both camps here.

While I understand man's effect on the environment and the science behind it, I agree with Gordon that the hyperbole spouted about the sky falling is ridiculous.

Leisher wrote: I agree with Gordon that the hyperbole spouted about the sky falling is ridiculous.

That hyperbole is where they lose me. Lies don't help the cause.

I'd bet a dollar that I have a smaller carbon footprint than anyone else on this forum, but I have no illusions that, globally, I'm making any difference to the environment.

GORDON wrote: That hyperbole is where they lose me. Lies don't help the cause.

The emails proving they were fudging data did not help their cause either.

GORDON wrote: I'd bet a dollar that I have a smaller carbon footprint than anyone else on this forum, but I have no illusions that, globally, I'm making any difference to the environment.

The average person isn't the problem.

The corporations and governments of the world are the issue.

And yet the "solutions" offered keep being the ones that the individual people are responsible for.

GORDON wrote: And yet the "solutions" offered keep being the ones that the individual people are responsible for.

They tried a bigger one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agr ... gotiations

Was that the one that didn't actually do anything about the big polluters, China and India?

GORDON wrote: Was that the one that didn't actually do anything about the big polluters, China and India?

Yes, it's a complete fucking joke. I posted about it here somewhere.

China is the #1 polluter in the world. India is #3. Neither have to do shit in that deal.